The Interdisciplinary (ID) Team for the Colorado River Valley Field Office Resource Management Plan (RMP) Revision is now accepting comments on the Draft RMP/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

Comments must be in writing, substantive, and timely in order to merit a written response.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT CONSIDERATIONS:Before submitting a comment, you should be aware that your entire comment including your personal identifying information such as your address, phone number, e-mail address, may be made publicly available at any time.While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee we will be able to do so.

The following guidelines will help ensure your comments will be considered:

·Include your complete name, address, and phone number.Anonymous comments will not be considered.

·Identify the portion of the document on which you are commenting.At the very minimum, provide the chapter, section, and page number that contain the information on which you are commenting.

·Ensure your comments are substantive.

Substantive comments do one or more of the following:

Question, with reasonable basis, the accuracy of information in the EIS (example: “Based on 2009 surveys by the Wildlife Department, the number of beaver dams appears to be incorrect.”)

Question, with reasonable basis, the adequacy of, methodology for, or assumptions used for the environmental analysis (example: The Department of Air Resources uses a more accurate methodology for calculating particulate matter.)

Present new information relevant to the analysis (example: “Total exports from the planning area in 2009 were $1.2 million.”)

Present reasonable alternatives other than those analyzed in the EIS (example: “Please find enclosed a Maximize Geothermal Development alternative.”)

Cause changes or revision in one or more of the alternatives (example: “The Miranda Hills ACEC should be removed from Alternatives B and C because it does not allow for the Prestige Transmission Line.”)

Comments that are not considered substantive include the following:

Comments in favor of or against the proposed action or alternatives without reasoning that meet the criteria listed above (example: “We disagree with Alternative A and believe the BLM should select Alternative C.”)

Comments that only agree or disagree with BLM policy or resource decisions without justification or supporting data that meet the criteria listed above (example: “More oil and gas leasing should be allowed.”)

Comments that don’t pertain to the planning area (example: “All roads in the South Hills should remain open.”)

Comments on project-level decisions (example: “A trough should be installed near Sparrow Creek.”)

Comments that take the form of vague, open-ended questions (example: “What about restoration?”

Comments can be submitted in the following ways:

Online (Out Of Order):

The webform for sumitting comments has been removed.Please call our web manager if this poses a problem for submitting your comment. (970) 724-3041.